test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

About the patch notes....

cmdrskyfallercmdrskyfaller Member Posts: 0 Arc User
General:

The Galaxy Class starships have some new and exciting improvements!
Details can be read at: Galaxy Class Reboot Blog
Resolved an issue which was causing some KDF captains to not be able to switch to all costumes slots.
The shared cooldown between "Team" powers of different careers has been removed.
There is still a shared cooldown between two "Team" powers of the same career, e.g. Science Team I and Science Team III.
The upgrades to the Dyson EV suits are now back in the lobi store.
All Special Fleet projects will be available to slot from 3/6/14 - 4/29/14.
If your fleet has already completed a special project, it will not be a choice to slot.
The size of the personal bank window now saves its size when modified.
The “limited time” message for the Dyson Science Destroyers in the lobi store has been removed.
This ship is permanently in the lobi store.
The Intrepid’s nacelles animate correctly when warping in and out of sector space.


Removing the shared cooldown between team powers will only make escorts (all ships but escorts primarily) much more survivable and thus increasing the time they can spend sitting in space adding up the dps. A single science team 2 and engineering 2 can fill up the shields and hull of these ships to almost max.

This is a very bad gameplay decision. I know players will welcome it and cheer...but the impact it has on the game is not going to be positive. The already out of control DPS creep just got a major boost.

When will Cryptic address the DPS creep?

KDF costume slots: 4+ years waiting for this... I will hope it is actually fixed.
Post edited by cmdrskyfaller on
«1

Comments

  • szerontzurszerontzur Member Posts: 2,724 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Removing the shared cooldown between team powers will only make escorts (all ships but escorts primarily) much more survivable and thus increasing the time they can spend sitting in space adding up the dps. A single science team 2 and engineering 2 can fill up the shields and hull of these ships to almost max.

    ....

    KDF costume slots: 4+ years waiting for this... I will hope it is actually fixed.

    The reasoning:
    http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=1042681

    It doesn't address the core issue with tactical team cycling being a lazy crutch mechanic, but the reasoning behind it seems perfectly fair in my opinion.


    As for the Costume fix, I am curious if the Be'ves has returned as a part of that or not.
  • voporakvoporak Member Posts: 5,621 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    There's a 20-some page discussion on this down in the PvP subforum, the debate's been going since Monday (when the Tribbles patch notes went up). But no matter what we think, nothing's changing. It's going live, like it or not.
    I ask nothing but that you remember me.
  • kjwashingtonkjwashington Member Posts: 2,529 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Well, if they aren't going to nerf A2B+3 technician DOffs+DEM+Marion+BFaW3 which gives cruisers more dps than escorts, then I suppose giving escorts the ability to tank like cruisers is fair. The game's trinity never really made sense in the first place. Now all they need to do is give sci-ships that buff they desperately need more than the other two ever had.
    FaW%20meme_zpsbkzfjonz.jpg
    Support 90 degree arc limitation on BFaW! Save our ships from looking like flying disco balls of dumb!
  • cmdrskyfallercmdrskyfaller Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Thanks I had no idea that thread existed.


    I will point out one major flaw in the dev's reasoning:

    They are making this change because tac team was mandatory.

    Why? Autoshield balancing.

    Going further, the ONLY ships that could run two tac teams are escorts or the lt cmdr tac capable cruisers...because only then are there enough tactical slots to dual cycle tac team and have at least 2 weapon buffs of some sort minimum.


    So... instead of changing tactical team's ridiculous bonus of shield autobalancing they release the other teams from the shared timer... so that escorts can now STILL dual tac team -AND- insta-heal shields and armor.


    incredibly bad design decision.
  • projectfrontierprojectfrontier Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Thanks I had no idea that thread existed.


    I will point out one major flaw in the dev's reasoning:

    They are making this change because tac team was mandatory.

    Why? Autoshield balancing.

    Going further, the ONLY ships that could run two tac teams are escorts or the lt cmdr tac capable cruisers...because only then are there enough tactical slots to dual cycle tac team and have at least 2 weapon buffs of some sort minimum.


    So... instead of changing tactical team's ridiculous bonus of shield autobalancing they release the other teams from the shared timer... so that escorts can now STILL dual tac team -AND- insta-heal shields and armor.


    incredibly bad design decision.

    The only ships that can run paired tac team WITHOUT gimping other tactical options have 3-4+ tactical power slots. The problem with this situation begins with the mechanics of how weapons function and how tactical powers make them far more powerful.

    The other points?

    Imagine A2B builds dumping TT,ST,ET every 15 seconds.
  • projectfrontierprojectfrontier Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Exactly my point.

    then we are on near consensus, hail blargatlharhghbplat.
  • blassreiterusblassreiterus Member Posts: 1,294 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    incredibly bad design decision.
    Oh, it is, is it? Maybe to you, it's a bad decision, however, to other people it is not a bad decision. I don't mind the change. Does that mean I'm playing badly because I see no problem with the change? No, it doesn't.
    Star Trek Online LTS player.
  • iconiansiconians Member Posts: 6,987 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Oh, it is, is it? Maybe to you, it's a bad decision, however, to other people it is not a bad decision. I don't mind the change. Does that mean I'm playing badly because I see no problem with the change? No, it doesn't.

    It addresses the root of the problem, and not a symptom of the problem. The root of the problem is the gameplay itself is flawed, and a symptom of that problem is player choice has generally defaulted to tac-heavy gameplay (whether it be escorts, tactical-focused cruisers, science ships with high damage capabilities, etc.)

    Those who think it is a bad design choice are those who are still stuck in the mindset that if it is not a band-aid solution to the temporary problems we're seeing now, then it is a bad choice.

    Those who see it as a good design choice are those who recognize the big picture for what it is and see this as one small step into a larger agenda where ships can be competitive with each other, but in different ways -- to paraphrase adjudicatorhawk.

    Which is what the goal should be, even if it temporarily does not address this particular symptom. I personally don't mind having to deal with more broken builds if it means continual work in the future to smooth things out based on testing, observation and subsequent player behaviors with builds.
    ExtxpTp.jpg
  • newromulan1newromulan1 Member Posts: 2,229
    edited March 2014
    iconians wrote: »
    It addresses the root of the problem, and not a symptom of the problem. The root of the problem is the gameplay itself is flawed, and a symptom of that problem is player choice has generally defaulted to tac-heavy gameplay (whether it be escorts, tactical-focused cruisers, science ships with high damage capabilities, etc.)

    Those who think it is a bad design choice are those who are still stuck in the mindset that if it is not a band-aid solution to the temporary problems we're seeing now, then it is a bad choice.

    Those who see it as a good design choice are those who recognize the big picture for what it is and see this as one small step into a larger agenda where ships can be competitive with each other, but in different ways -- to paraphrase adjudicatorhawk.

    Which is what the goal should be, even if it temporarily does not address this particular symptom. I personally don't mind having to deal with more broken builds if it means continual work in the future to smooth things out based on testing, observation and subsequent player behaviors with builds.

    Really? This is all about turning this game into more easy mode. Now you don't need to worry about deciding - should I Tac team for the shield heal and risk being shut down for a few seconds by a voth or romulan npc sub nuke. Now you can bind all boff power to space bar and just mash away - this is your official welcome to "Spacebar Online(tm)"
  • iconiansiconians Member Posts: 6,987 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Really? This is all about turning this game into more easy mode. Now you don't need to worry about deciding - should I Tac team for the shield heal and risk being shut down for a few seconds by a voth or romulan npc sub nuke. Now you can bind all boff power to space bar and just mash away - this is you official welcome to "Spacebar Online(tm)"

    At this present time, maybe. You're seeing the current changes as some kind of end-all-be-all solution, when it's pretty obvious it isn't. This is not going to be the last patch to ever hit the game.

    Would you prefer Cryptic to give you a quick solution, or would you prefer the solution to be done right and sustainable?

    They're just now starting to come to their senses that the player clamor for more tac console slots, more universal boff slots, and more lt cmdr. boff slots is a symptom of flawed gameplay design rather than flawed ship design. I'd prefer it if they weren't scared off from this line of thinking.

    There's an old rhetorical proverb, "Do you want it done fast, or do you want it done right?"

    The changes to the 'team' abilities and the changes to sensor analysis shows some promise as they are taking this one step at a time and making observations and adjustments on that. Unfortunately, that means having to spend time watching people abuse the hell out of the builds so they have a baseline comparison.

    To see ships properly balanced in this game, it's important to understand there will not be a panacea and there will be a lot of changes that will temporarily be seen as a bad decision, but will make sense in the long-term as more changes and adjustments are made.
    ExtxpTp.jpg
  • kjwashingtonkjwashington Member Posts: 2,529 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    FaW%20meme_zpsbkzfjonz.jpg
    Support 90 degree arc limitation on BFaW! Save our ships from looking like flying disco balls of dumb!
  • newromulan1newromulan1 Member Posts: 2,229
    edited March 2014
    iconians wrote: »
    At this present time, maybe. You're seeing the current changes as some kind of end-all-be-all solution, when it's pretty obvious it isn't. This is not going to be the last patch to ever hit the game.

    Would you prefer Cryptic to give you a quick solution, or would you prefer the solution to be done right and sustainable?

    They're just now starting to come to their senses that the player clamor for more tac console slots, more universal boff slots, and more lt cmdr. boff slots is a symptom of flawed gameplay design rather than flawed ship design. I'd prefer it if they weren't scared off from this line of thinking.

    There's an old rhetorical proverb, "Do you want it done fast, or do you want it done right?"

    The changes to the 'team' abilities and the changes to sensor analysis shows some promise as they are taking this one step at a time and making observations and adjustments on that. Unfortunately, that means having to spend time watching people abuse the hell out of the builds so they have a baseline comparison.

    To see ships properly balanced in this game, it's important to understand there will not be a panacea and there will be a lot of changes that will temporarily be seen as a bad decision, but will make sense in the long-term as more changes and adjustments are made.

    You believe this? Their goal is to make this game so face roll easy that a 5 year old could 'win' just by mashing space bar. They are removing thought, challenge, and any real cost that could pose a threat to players. Color me impressed when they add all boff abilities to npc. How about adding tac team, Rev shield polarity, polarize hull, emergency power to engines, etc etc to all npc's?? Oh wait that would make things a small challenge - can't have that in Spacebar Online.
  • no09dysonsphereno09dysonsphere Member Posts: 410 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    iconians wrote: »
    At this present time, maybe. You're seeing the current changes as some kind of end-all-be-all solution, when it's pretty obvious it isn't. This is not going to be the last patch to ever hit the game.

    Would you prefer Cryptic to give you a quick solution, or would you prefer the solution to be done right and sustainable?

    They're just now starting to come to their senses that the player clamor for more tac console slots, more universal boff slots, and more lt cmdr. boff slots is a symptom of flawed gameplay design rather than flawed ship design. I'd prefer it if they weren't scared off from this line of thinking.

    There's an old rhetorical proverb, "Do you want it done fast, or do you want it done right?"

    The changes to the 'team' abilities and the changes to sensor analysis shows some promise as they are taking this one step at a time and making observations and adjustments on that. Unfortunately, that means having to spend time watching people abuse the hell out of the builds so they have a baseline comparison.

    To see ships properly balanced in this game, it's important to understand there will not be a panacea and there will be a lot of changes that will temporarily be seen as a bad decision, but will make sense in the long-term as more changes and adjustments are made.

    I'd rather they not roll out their changes piecemeal and haphazardly, and use the tribble server for testing and feedback like it's intended.
  • iconiansiconians Member Posts: 6,987 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    You believe this? There goal is to make this game so face roll easy that a 5 year old could 'win' just by mashing space bar. They are removing thought, challenge, and any real cost that could pose a threat to players. Color me impressed when they add all boff abilities to npc. How about adding tac team, Rev shield polarity, polarize hull, emergency power to engines, etc etc to all npc's?? Oh wait that would make things a small challenge - can't have that in Spacebar Online.

    If you're not being hyperbolic, from my perspective the game is already face roll easy. This game already is and has been incredibly easy with little challenge. This has been something I've mentioned numerous times.

    When my perspective is that the game is already easy and requires no thought or challenge to it, then somehow worsening that temporarily is either seen as

    A: Not terribly different to how things already are.

    B: A temporary pain for a long-term solution.

    If these team changes are going to shake up the gameplay and create this much controversy, I honestly can't see that as anything else other than a good thing. Gameplay has stagnated on cramming the highest DPS into a ship and calling it a day. That's what I consider face roll easy.

    I'm not expecting that to change overnight, I'm not expecting these changes to address this problem at this point in time. I am expecting Cryptic employees to continue drawing a paycheck and recognizing this is one step into a comprehensive long-term goal.

    This game is already easy, so if your argument is 'it makes the game too easy', then I'm not seeing much of a difference for me to care.
    ExtxpTp.jpg
  • iconiansiconians Member Posts: 6,987 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I'd rather they not roll out their changes piecemeal and haphazardly, and use the tribble server for testing and feedback like it's intended.

    So would I. Unfortunately, the way things are... that's not going to happen. Holodeck has been the test server for a few years now. I don't like it. But that's the way things are.
    ExtxpTp.jpg
  • newromulan1newromulan1 Member Posts: 2,229
    edited March 2014
    iconians wrote: »
    If you're not being hyperbolic, from my perspective the game is already face roll easy. This game already is and has been incredibly easy with little challenge. This has been something I've mentioned numerous times.

    When my perspective is that the game is already easy and requires no thought or challenge to it, then somehow worsening that temporarily is either seen as

    A: Not terribly different to how things already are.

    B: A temporary pain for a long-term solution.

    If these team changes are going to shake up the gameplay and create this much controversy, I honestly can't see that as anything else other than a good thing. Gameplay has stagnated on cramming the highest DPS into a ship and calling it a day. That's what I consider face roll easy.

    I'm not expecting that to change overnight, I'm not expecting these changes to address this problem at this point in time. I am expecting Cryptic employees to continue drawing a paycheck and recognizing this is one step into a comprehensive long-term goal.

    This game is already easy, so if your argument is 'it makes the game too easy', then I'm not seeing much of a difference for me to care.

    The problem is you see this as a stop to fixing the game some how, when really it is just a step to making it even easier and more face roll easy than before. Now there is no downside to choosing one team power or another, there is no opportunity cost and now no npc's pose any kind of threat. If I was to believe that they were trying to make this game better, then the notes would have included that these team powers were given to ALL npc's. But you know that will never happen.
  • iconiansiconians Member Posts: 6,987 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    The problem is you see this as a stop to fixing the game some how, when really it is just a step to making it even easier and more face roll easy than before. Now there is no downside to choosing one team power or another, there is no opportunity cost and now no npc's pose any kind of threat. If I was to believe that they were trying to make this game better, then the notes would have included that these team powers were given to ALL npc's. But you know that will never happen.

    If this is the last patch to ever hit STO with changing gameplay itself, then I will eat my words and admit I was wrong.
    ExtxpTp.jpg
  • cmdrskyfallercmdrskyfaller Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    The reason why its faceroll easy is precisely because changes like this ARE band-aid solutions to a bigger problem. The problem NEVER gets addressed even years afterwards.

    Take for example the secondary deflectors. Have you seen the so called bonuses they're giving? They're not addressing the FACT that the science abilities are nerfed beyond belief...and instead of fixing the sci abilities at the benefit-per-stat-point level they are adding procs and add-ups on top of a broken system. That is all a band-aid fix.


    to a gaping chest wound.
  • deathsremnantdeathsremnant Member Posts: 265
    edited March 2014
    This is probably a step one of many to address Tact team. Honestly they should have never shared CD's. Theyre skills in completely different categories from different Boff types...Would be like having FAW share a CD with GW because they both do dmg, or emergency power to shields share a CD with transfer shield str...


    Now tact team as a whole is a little too strong. Basically turning all shield facings into 1 super powered facing never made sense to me (especially from a tact position) Not to mention the + dmg and removal of boarding parties.

    "Only ships with a Lt com tact can run 2 tact teams"...Incorrect by far...As long as you have 2 Tact boff slots you can run a FAW boat easily with 2 tact teams even if its only a Lt + ensign, and most do...now if you want a Beam+torp boat its basically impossible with out a Lt com slot.

    I use to play basically only Tact officers...but after Season 8 and all the power creep items added its just too bland for my tastes...Sad but I do have a lot more fun on a sci in a sci-torp boat or a engi in a beam cruiser

    TL ; DR Im happy with the change, now lets see if they address Tact team at a later time.
  • gogereavergogereaver Member Posts: 166 Arc User
    edited March 2014
  • hunteralpha84hunteralpha84 Member Posts: 524 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I have to admit I like the changes. It makes science teams and engineering teams usable and it makes ensign slots less of a burden.

    The only reason tactical team is "essential" is because of the shield distribution. I would like it if they experimented with removing the shield distribution from tac team. It has the potential to make certain builds less "invulnerable" it would mean attacking a specific facing worthwhile. And it could possibly make torpedos useful again without that ever so thin sliver of shield reducing their damage.

    Of course ultimately I would rather they remade the shield system so you can have either balanced distribution or you can pick one facing to buff.
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I for one welcome the change, as I never could understand why differing teams need waiting on one another.

    Another bight side is those who pvp can now expect some real battles, and not those quick instant vapes due to dps outweighing healing capacity.

    Yesss good long battles will make you feel warm and fuzzy when a kill is scored!!! :P
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • jockey1979jockey1979 Member Posts: 1,005 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I'd rather they not roll out their changes piecemeal and haphazardly, and use the tribble server for testing and feedback like it's intended.
    iconians wrote: »
    So would I. Unfortunately, the way things are... that's not going to happen. Holodeck has been the test server for a few years now. I don't like it. But that's the way things are.

    Problem with the test server is, not enough people use it for Cryptic to get a decent set of results.

    The only times I see a decent number of people on there is when there is some free rewards for playing on it for a weekend.

    So Cryptic do the only thing they can honestly do - throw it on live and adjust it later.

    Like it or not, unless people start to give up their DPS epeen comparing for 30 minutes a day to actually go and test stuff properly, Cryptic has no other choice as they are not getting enough honest feedback.
  • lucho80lucho80 Member Posts: 6,600 Bug Hunter
    edited March 2014
    iconians wrote: »
    Changes to the 'team' abilities and the changes to sensor analysis

    Pardon my question, but where have they mentioned changes to sensor analysis?
  • longasclongasc Member Posts: 490
    edited March 2014
    I welcome the change to have no shared cooldown for "teams" of a different kind.

    Tac Team is indeed overused because it is so good. Maybe the solution is to work on Tac Team.
    Historically, it was useless and now turned into near mandatory.

    -> How about making Tac Team only strengthen the front shield arc when hit?
  • thyrnecristhyrnecris Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    longasc wrote: »
    -> How about making Tac Team only strengthen the front shield arc when hit?

    My Idea would be: Keep it as it is - but change the duration of the 'Auto-Rebalance'. TT1 gives 4 Seconds, TT2 gives 7, TT3 gives 10 seconds. Or, alternative: 3/6/10.

    That way, you have it as 'Oh Carp!' button, but to get the current levels of TT creep, you would need to give up 1 or 2 LtC Slots.
  • stumpfgobsstumpfgobs Member Posts: 297 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    longasc wrote: »
    -> How about making Tac Team only strengthen the front shield arc when hit?

    I would put an energy loss mechanic in place. Some shield capacity gets lost because the transfer of power is so fast. TT1 loses 50% shield points during the transfer (from 2 points transfered from the sides only 1 arrives at the facing its transfered to). TT2 gets 30% and TT3 gets 10%.
    Just an example.

    edit: throw in some different timers, like thymecris suggested, and the different levels of tt looks very nice. I'd actually make the timers longer so people can keep up TT3 almost permanently - the efficiency loss would be a significant drawback especially if the attackers switch the side they are attacking fast and the energy gets transfered often.
  • edited March 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • ursusmorologusursusmorologus Member Posts: 5,328 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I guess they dont want to give *yet another* buff to damage

    What they could do is give a buff to overall combat performance, like slight increases (2%, 5%, 8%) in accuracy, speed, turn-rate, power transfer rate, etc.

    Even better would be remove a bunch of TRIBBLE from APO and move it into TT where it is accessible to everyone, and where it can be cast on a teammate.
Sign In or Register to comment.